Comments

Comment Policy

At The Catholic Herald we want our articles to provoke spirited and lively debate. We also want to ensure the discussions hosted on our website are carried out in civil terms.

All commenters are therefore politely asked to ensure that their posts respond directly to points raised in the particular article or by fellow contributors, and that all responses are respectful.

Scheveningen

The Guardian article on the beatification of the Spanish martyrs is an extraordinarily biased one which tries to politicise the occasion. It says there was tight security because of dangers that the ceremony would be hijacked by the far right when it is more likely that it was because it would be attacked by the far left. It describes Pope Francis’s message as ‘controversial’ because he did not mention Franco. Why should he? These martyrs were murdered because of their faith. In fact, thousands of Catholics were killed by the Republican forces in the Civil War for this reason alone. I point this out, not because I would have supported Franco, but in the interest of truth.

AnthonyPatrick

Yes, The Guardian, like the BBC, alternates on the one hand between propagandist bias that favours a sort of liberal fascism (aka liberal leftism) and, on the other hand, sitting on the fence of pseudo-impartiality rather than reporting truths that might inconveniently unsettle the comfort zones of the coterie whose interests it represents and promotes.

NatOns

‘Archbishop Piero Marini has described Sacrosanctum Concilium as “a magna carta capable of inspiring the renewal of the Church“.’

For those who cannot easily understand me, strap in tight (or leap out now), for another bumpy flight is about to begin..

Here I must blame myself for failure in witness to the Faith – as must my bothers and sisters who also maintain an Orthodox Catholic love for Sacred Tradition – for Archbishop Marini is correct about Sacrosanctam Concilium, of course, it was intended to be the leap of inspiration set to renew the Church (in line with the care of Pius X and XII – no one denied that BTW).

The problem rather is not what it was for, but what we allowed it to be used for .. a reality Archbishop Marini obdurately ignores .. it was used as ‘the reason’ for denuding the Church of all but all of what makes it ‘catholic’ (and orthodox for that matter).

We have all allowed the interwoven ambiguities in the texts of the Council Fathers to become a weapon against Sacred Tradition (the Modernist intention), rather than what they are (the Orthodox intention) – that is, the most vulnerable kink in the Modernist mindset .. and this kink is, not least, an opportunity to free all those who feel revitalised by Pope Francis from any lingering hopes that there must be rupture in Catholic Church, Jesus Christ in Person, of Whom me are but members.

It is we, the orthodox, who are more to blame for this spirit of rupture than the all singing all dancing rupturist spirit; too often we have allowed Screwtape and his fellow servants their own way (in service of the their infernal father). In this the SSPX does not go without an especial – if understandable – mention in failure .. because it has sought only to oppose the Council Fathers rather than compose themselves to them, and draw to out whatsoever there is of Sacred Tradition in their documents (however little or lacquered over with ambiguity and error). Sacrosanctam Concilium was a call to renewal, it is so still, but not a renewal that seeks iconoclastic fervour rather the renewal of perfect holiness, as our Father is perfect being Holy; a recognisable unchangeability even amid every occult change.

‘Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and for ever.’ Heb 13 : 8.